Search This Blog

request for Govt. survey pending suits - In the circumstances, we direct the respondent authorities to conduct survey of the land in question afresh, after giving notice to both the parties. However, the result of such survey or any order that may be passed in that regard shall be subject to the outcome of the civil suits relating to the land in question, which are pending before the Civil Court.

WRIT APPEAL NO.105 OF 2012

This writ appeal is directed against the order dt.25.7.2012 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge, in W.P. No.22689 of 2012.

Respondent No.1 – writ petitioner filed the writ petition to declare the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein in not taking any action on the representation/application dt.24.4.2012 made by the writ petitioner for survey, demarcation and fixation of boundaries of the land admeasuring Ac.5.18 cents in Sy. No.110 of Yanamadala Village, Nuzvid Mandal, Krishna District, as illegal and arbitrary.

The Hon’ble Single Judge, after considering the matter, disposed of the said writ petition by order dt.25.7.2012 directing respondent No.2 therein to take necessary steps on the application dt.24.4.2012 submitted by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. It was further observed that if there is any ground for not conducting survey of the land, respondent No.2 shall communicate the same to the petitioner.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order dt.25.7.2012 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge, this writ appeal is filed by the appellant, who is a third party to the writ petition, with the leave of this Court.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The appellant herein was not made a party to the writ petition. According to him, respondent No.1 - writ petitioner approached this Court by suppressing the fact of pending suits before Civil Court, relating to the subject lands, and obtained the impugned order.

In the circumstances, we direct the respondent authorities to conduct survey of the land in question afresh, after giving notice to both the parties. However, the result of such survey or any order that may be passed in that regard shall be subject to the outcome of the civil suits relating to the land in question, which are pending before the Civil Court.

The Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Chandra Kumar Appeal Suit No.144 of 2012 Dated 9th August, 2012Judgment: The appellant filed this appeal challenging Order, dated27-01-2012, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Darsi, in CFR.No.90 of 2012, refusing to register the suit filed by him on the ground that the same is barred by limitation . The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance basing on agreement of sale, dated 13-11-2008. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement of sale, the balance amount of Rs.4 lakhs out of the total sale price of Rs.9 lakhs was to be paid within two months from the date of expiry of the limitation of the said agreement of sale. The case of the appellant is that though he had been requesting the respondent to receive the balance sale consideration and register the sale deed in his favour, the respondent did not come forward; that therefore, he got issued a legal notice to the respondent on12-10-2011; that the respondent acknowled…

Or.18, rule 17 and sec.151 C.P.C - petition filed for reopen and examination of the executant of Ex.A1 the sale deed to fill up the lacuna in evidence pointed out at the time of arguments not maintainable =in VadirajNaggappa Vernekar (deceased by L.Rs) v. Sharad Chand Prabhakar Gogate (supra), it is held as follows: "17. It is now well settled that the power to recall any witness underOrder 18 Rule 17 CPC can be exercised by the Court either on its own motion oron an application filed by any of the parties to the suit, but as indicatedhereinabove, such power is to be invoked not to fill up the lacunae in theevidence of the witness which has already been recorded but to clear anyambiguity that may have arisen during the course of his examination. Of course,if the evidence on re-examination of a witness has a bearing on the ultimatedecision of the suit, it is always within the discretion of the Trial Court topermit recall of such a witness for re-examination-in-chief with permis…

The 1st respondent herein filed O.S.No.101 of 2011 in the Court of III
Additional District Judge, Tirupati against the appellants and respondents 2 to
5 herein, for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule
property, a hotel at Srikalahasti, Chittoor District. He pleaded that the land
on which the hotel was constructed was owned by the appellants and respondents 2
and 3, and his wife by name Saroja, and all of them gave the property on lease
to M/s. Swarna Restaurant Private Limited, 4th respondent herein, under a
document …